We wanted to say we'll still support a second controller for another hand to join in the game

That is in fact consoles' biggest advantage over PCs. Because consoles are more often connected to a monitor large enough to support two to four players offline, major labels are more likely to develop games that support two to four players offline for consoles than for PCs. Case in point: Where are the PC fighting games other than Street Fighter IV?

Actually, according to this article in Wired [wired.com] the PS4 will be able to do it both ways. Publishers have the option of "registering" their games. Guess which they'll do? This is just a marketing ploy for Sony to be able to say "We aren't disabling used games, the publishers are!

It's too bad that publishers just don't start offering games at reasonable prices right from the get-go. I've built my Steam library almost solely on deals on got on games - in fact, the only new release I bought at full price was Skyrim. For the 40 or so titles in my library, I maybe spent $600 - an average of $15 per games. My library has a good cross section of cheaper indie titles (Trine, Limbo) to "premium" titles (Batman AA & AC).. If first run games were offered at say half the price, I think it would cut way down on used games (profit margin would be way to low at that point), and maybe some piracy. Right now, I can't spend $60 on a game just coming out. I wait until they drop the price. Unfortunately I got my kids a Wii U, so bargain shopping may be a ways off...

Yep, on the PC now even retail purchased games are requiring codes to be tied to some online account, so you'd have to setup a new account for each and every game you buy, and if sold would have to hand over the account itself as well.

Wasn't Gamespot or someone discounting used copies of some popular game by like $10, which was the cost of the one time use activation code?

Sony can set any standards they like on their console and often do. They have all kinds of weird ones done just for marketing or to keep the button layout fairly standard, they could easily require no onetime use codes for game content.

The honest way to do what you are talking about is to reduce the game price by $10 and move that stuff into a $10 DLC. That way everyone knows up front what they are getting into.

Sony and publishers of games on Sony's platforms have already been doing that since the PlayStation 2 by shutting off the matchmaking server of any game that's a couple years old. The most common error message is "DNAS error -103: This software title is not in service."

Or, as likely, there will be no *requirement* for games to be locked to a particular account or console, but the device will support that feature. That way some companies can sell games in the traditional manner (on a resellable optical disc), lending credence to Sony's claim. However, increasingly publishers will make use of the PS4's built-in DRM system so as to lock games to particular consoles or accounts, which are then impossible to resell. The former category of games rapidly dwindles to a trickle

That way Sony won't be lying; you can play (some) used games on the consoles, if the games support it. You just won't be able to buy games with that feature anymore.

Official: Sony removes ability to play used games.
Posted by samzenpus on Friday February 20, @06:19AM
From the but-they-promised department.

An anonymous readers writes

Despite initially permitting Playstation 4 owners to play used games, a recent update silently removed this feature. Responding to outrage on the Sony forums Sony stated that the cause of the removal was increased rates of piracy, you don't want to be a pirate don't you. Sony also reminded users that they are too financially and emotionally invested in the Playstation already to go to any of their competitors so they should just suck it up and take it. Another poster pointed out that according to the Playstation 4 EULA, Sony owned their dicks.

While this article is framed as a victory for the consumer, it is yet another reminder that technology [such as Cinavia [wikipedia.org]] can, and will, be used to subvert our existing rights [to lend, copy, borrow, make backups].

Step by step, resistance will be overcome and we shall be reduced to facilitators of consumption, thanks to the ever-increasing apathy amongst the general public.

While this article is framed as a victory for the consumer, it is yet another reminder that technology [such as Cinavia [wikipedia.org]] can, and will, be used to subvert our existing rights [to lend, copy, borrow, make backups].

Step by step, resistance will be overcome and we shall be reduced to facilitators of consumption, thanks to the ever-increasing apathy amongst the general public.

If you simply buy and play games (or watch movies or listen to music), you are already just a facilitator of consumption, you just don't realise it.

The main "right" you have is the right to stop buying/downloading/borrowing stuff and go and do something creative instead, if you're that worried about it.

That was all an illusion. We never had any real rights in the face of the juggernaut that is copyright.

In the eyes of publishers, books, CDs, and floppy disks were inconvenient and flawed means of distributing content, because they could not control the content after it left their hands. Furthermore, they were physically limited and subject to damage, which caused such abominations as lending and backups to become necessary.

The internet handed them exactly what they wanted: no need for flawed, uncontrollabl

Without upgrading, most newer games will not play on the PS3. Older games will not be playable online. If I buy a PS3, I kind of expect to play PS3 games on it. That seems like the point of buying a PS3.

Your choice is to upgrade to play games, or keep Linux. As a consumer, I think that's a bit shitty.

Sony may also use product registration data to hunt down and kill their customers. Why not?

Because unlike what you propose, Sony has done something like that on all three of its previous platforms. Net Yaroze was produced in far too limited quantities, as was the PS2 Linux kit. Then the PS3 had Other OS taken away in a system software update.

It's clear that the PS4 is aimed at addressing many of the disadvantages of downloaded games (streaming full games to try them out, being able to play games before they finish downloading, etc.). If you can get people predominantly downloading games you obviate the second-hand games problem.

(But not reselling digital games, although Valve's legal team are hard at work to hobble that.)

Even then, one of the big selling points for Valve is that they offer steep sale prices frequently.

Sony & MS on the other hand will sell a download game for more then the it's retail counterpart because they do not want to piss off the retailers. Valve does not have this concern since few places still sell retail copies, and even then only the biggest AAA game of the month.

The only difference is the PS+ offering which is more like renting for an unknown time since games can come and go from the service.

Also it's unfair to demonize just Valve for the digital goods. Apple and other retailers of digital goods have been trying the whole "license/lease" argument for years, long before Steam became popular.

Yet their crap has never been foreshadowed by explicit comments to the contrary. If there's one thing that Sony is good at, it's ensuring that ideas that go against the customer's interest are a surprise to the customer.

It's also true though that they had probably the most open console otherwise. they supported any usb devices (thumbdrives, headsets, kb+m, printers, etc) any 2.5 inch storage (hd or ssd), bluetooth headsets, etc. No other console maker was as open about that.

Almost correct, in the beginning not all games were playable on the PS3, they would add more compatibility packs in time, but I haven't seen much of that activity from them. I believe this is more accurate.

Maybe they realized they actually wanted to sell a few. Certainly I believe there is a huge market who only buy because they think they'll sell the product on again later to get some money back, even if they never get actually round to it.And those that do... many re-invest what they make back into buying newer games.Thinking a £40+ item may be a dud that can never be resold is seriously going to put people off.Those that are happy to wait months to years to buy second hand because a title is too expe

They are not in cahoots, they are competing. The first one to introduce such a system is taking a huge risk. If their competitor has any brains at all it would be the time to start advertising that you do not do that.

Even if you never buy a used game you likely rent games or have people over who bring a game with them. Me and my brother trade games via the mail for instance. No money changes hands.

PS4 not playing used games when Xbox720 does would mean the end of Sony having a console.

Of course this speaks nothing about the use of licences required to use an ever increasing part of the games, be it various forms of DLC, or even the ability to go online at all. If the new game comes with some such licence tied to PSN, which requires $10 or more to buy separately, that second hand copy might not seem as atractive anymore.

(the onion theme plays)
Breaking news on the Sony Playstation 4. A Sony Rep says it will actually be used to play games. While the main focus of the next generation of consoles has been on selling people more and more content and locking out features, an expert on the new platform says there is still room for gamers. "We're listening to our customers and hearing that they mainly just want to play games. We're seriously considering it for the Playstation 4."

I suspect Sony really don't want to withstand another volley of terrible publicity. I also doubt that they want to drag the whole issue through a court, which would almost certainly happen.

The current rules seem to be ill defined. Gamers technically own the games, but are at the whim of the PS Network. This gives Sony enormous power over defining what "ownership" actually means.

Prohibiting second hand games formally now would jeopardize the console sales. Doing it gradually or suddenly (like with Linux on the PS3) a year or two down the line by way of PS Network T&C changes would be far safer for them.

Don't pay attention to what he says, but what he doesn't. Sure it will play used games, he did not say what you have to do to play them. They might require you to sign into playstation network and pay an unlock fee which may or may not equal the price of the game as new for example. or you might be limited to X amount of hours to play a game that has been linked to a different console unit.

Ah yes, there is the comment I was looking for. Unless Sony explicitly comes out and says publicly that you will be able to play used games for the life of the console without paying a fee, this is just bullshit.

ALSO, I'd wait to see whether every game you care about has a bunch of first-buyer-only DLC before investing in a five hundred dollar lump of plastic.

The project $10 stuff isn't exclusive to the playstation though, the xbox and PC do it a ton as well. Hell, PC's have no used game market period in most places, due to cd keys and activation codes. I don't think such codes and DLC, passes, etc are going anywhere, as the publishers love them.

Because, you know, nothing would kill their new product faster than killing the used game market which many parents rely on to even justify buying their kids a console in the first place. Hell, even one of my DINKY friends refuses to buy games new because of the price.

Not to mention the fact that this will kill off various retailers dependent on used game profits that would bring the wrath of governments worldwide.

I am part of a DINK which makes more than twice the median family income, we still will not buy full priced games more than once a year. That is for christmas and only if someone requested such a thing. $60 for a video game is nuts. Don't tell me that there is a 100 hours of gameplay and it's only $0.60 an hour, I don't have 100 hours to waste on a damn video game. Hell, I normally have a stack of bargin bin AAA games that are a couple years old I am still working on.

He also doesn't point out the requirement to give your first born offspring either. While it may be prudent to make a point like this, doesn't make it true. We could make all sorts of claims about what he doesn't say.

It won't change things for me. Developers are still releasing games for PS2. PS3 is 'good enough' for most game playing enjoyment, and will be for a few more years. I foresee a very low uptake on the next gen of consoles, atleast right away. Lots of people will be playing PS3 games, and swappin

Yeah, a lot of folks will do what I do. The PS3 coming out meant I had a chance to get PS2 games cheap. I must have 100 of them now. The PS4 coming out should do the same thing to the PS3. The best time to own a console is right at the end of its life. Largest library, lowest cost games, cheap to replace if the unit dies and all the known bugs worked out.

My suspicion is that yes it will play used games. Because old console games (developed before this year, let's say) had no way of being identified, you can't tell if the game is used or not. So sure, they will allow that so your old library of games still works. Why give themselves bad press when there's no resolution to it.

But newly developed games? They will come with activation codes that prevent resale. So PS3 used games, ok, but PS4 exclusives will not allow it going into the future.

to be honest, from a person who has lived in Japan a very long time, this really doesn't come as too much of a surprise. There are dozens of VERY big chains and thousands upon thousands of stores both parts of chains and independently owned in Japan that exist almost solely for the exchange of used games. Some deal exclusively in games, most usually mix in some used books/manga/anime/magazines/DVDs/clothes but games and manga would definitely be their meat and potatoes if simple floorspace allocation is anything to go by. If there was any possibility that this was even remotely true, there's a very, very large population of Japanese people who would have already risen up as one angry mob complete with the Japanese modern day equivalent of torches and pitchforks and fucking SLAYED Sony.

Engadget [engadget.com] says that the guy was uncharacteristically hesitant when he made this declaration, implying that it's not the simple games distribution mechanism that we're familiar with. They speculate that there may be a fee or something else involved, or another approval process. Needless to say, if a single player game requires an internet connection there's reason to be suspicious.

That's actually positive, rather than negative. If he'd answered quickly it means the question and answer was rehearsed which means there was serious debate within Sony about implementing this feature. A slow answer means the exec probably didn't see the question coming, which means he wasn't involved in any discussions about the feature and didn't know immediately what the question refered to.

Gamers sleep walked into this years ago when PCs started printing codes to unlock games either installed from disc or downloaded from the likes of steam. Try installing from your Half Life 2 disc on someone else's account and see how far you get.

Even if Microsoft / Sony start embedding the serial nrs onto the disc it's fundamentally no different than what happened already for years. It just means users don't have to type in the code.

What is more worrying is that there are numerous ways that the serial nr's activation status can be used / abused. For example, one game might decide to disable online without a refresh code which is semi reasonable (the person buying the game didn't pay for the servers that run the online portion). But what if games become glorified playable demos, or the game starts showing annoying interstitial adverts in second hand form unless you buy a refresh code? You can bet the likes of EA, Activision, Ubisoft are already salivating at the ways they can claw back cash from second hand titles and they'll go as far as the console vendors let them unless there are reasonable limits.

honestly, Steam will probably be running longer than the 360 will before it breaks down. Assuming no or poor backward compatibility in the next gen console, to play the game forever you'll have to make a DIY-type console eventually, as we're not talking SNES level quality of hardware here.

For Steam, the way its going it will be purring long after that, and the day it stops purring, all we'll have to do is hack the games up...quite a bit more convenient than having to hack hardware up.

1) It doesn't mean they intend to use it. A lot of patents are defensive, a sort of financial mutually-assured-destruction plan. If they say they have no intention of using it, that probably means exactly that. The patent system being as silly as it is results in these types of ploys. Sort of like the man who goes to the dentist and when the dentist grabs the drill, reaches out and lightly grabs the dentist by the balls and says "let'

To be honest, there isn't much more leaping that Video games can do at this point. Short of being able to render Cinema CGI on the fly, Game Graphics are finished for now.

Also, this announcement was a shock for me with all the talk about blocking used games. So who is it really that will black used games, Microsoft?; we've yet to hear from them. Anything could change though.

Problem is you can't believe anything Sony says. I hate to rehash the other os removal, but that was sold as a feature with the console and they said several times it wouldn't be removed.

182w ago - Today Sony's Satoshi Hashimoto, in an interview with Impress Watch, confirmed that Sony will not be removing the OtherOS and Linux functionality in old (non-Slim) PlayStation 3 consoles.
Until now, many feared Sony would remove the functionality from older PS3 systems via PS3 Firmware 3.0 or a future update.
Additionally, he stated that there isn't an issue with the feature leaving a security hole with the system.
To quote Andriasang.com (linked above): "Rest assured, this will not happen. Sony's Satoshi Hashimoto, in an interview with Impress Watch, said that Sony will not be removing the feature, which he refers to as "Other OS functionality."
He also assured readers that there currently isn't a problem with the feature leaving a security hole with the system."
Read more: http://www.ps3news.com/PS3-Linux/ps3-otheros-linux-to-remain-in-old-ps3s-no-security-hole/#ixzz2LdA1yfmE [ps3news.com]

There were also a lot of other things that were sold with the original PS3 that were then removed in future releases of the console. PS2 backward compatibility as an example. The first gen PS3 had it in hardware, the second gen had it in software. Then it was silently removed altogether. Luckily they didn't retro actively remove it. I know it's a little different because by the time you both the PS3 thin it was well known it didn't exist any more. To me that seems like an easily repeatable, first gen PS4 allows used games then before people know it all the sudden the feature is removed or phased out.

Sony's demonstrated that you can't believe what they say. I bought into the PS3 partly for the Other Os and was burned. Anyone who buys into the PS4 after know what with the PS3 deserves to get burned when Sony pulls another stunt.

Sony has made it very clear that they aren't a customer focused company for at least the last 20 years. So just expect that they are going to do what benefits them no matter what it does to their customers and you won't be surprised. My personal answer has been to stop buying Sony products. The PS2 was the last thing I bought from them and I bought that at release so it has been 10+ years since I bought anything Sony. I considered buying a PS3 but then I read about all the shenanigans with PS2 support and b

That's beside the point I was making. Right now Sony says the PS4 will support second hand games. However, they’re still building support for publishers to tie a physical copy of a game to a console. The story that Sony and Microsoft are actively working against the second hand market has become very big lately and is becoming a huge factor in which, if any, console consumers are going to purchase.

I tried it, and yes, it sucked, mainly due to the lack of RAM in the PS3, or at least that was my impression. The new console with 8GB of memory would be an altogether different story, though, read: beast. And still, there were several universities and businesses using clusters of PS3 for some serious calculations, which is obviously much more feasible since in that case you would dispose of all the linux UI overhead.

I did use the other os feature. I'm a software developer it was very useful as a development testing platform. I also had it setup at one put to be a 3D rendering node for some of my hobby 3D modelling. until my cousin and wife put in a bluRay we rented. I was upstairs making snacks when they ran the update. I was pretty pissed. My wife at least should have known better. No use crying over spilt milk, I haven't even turned the console on since we watched that movie. I only own one other bluRay that I was given for Christmas and my TV has a build in media server. Now that companies are actually getting interested in gaming on Linux I have no need for a console at all. I still think it's important to inform people about consumer rights being eroded away by companies like Microsoft and Sony. The other os was a major factor in my decision to buy the PS3 instead of an XBox or a Wii at the time. Having that removed several years after the purchase was a big slap in the face. The fall out of that is companies now including no class actions in their shrink wrap agreements. Huge loss for the consumer.

Thanks for pointing that out. I did know about it, but it was a little under a year ago they forced the update. Since I haven't turned the PS3 on in 6+ months it just doesn't seem worth the hassle. Besides I shouldn't have to jail break my own hardware to get features I bought with it back. I should just be able to use it the way I bought it. Instead I just decided I'm not buying Sony any more and I make sure everyone that asks me for my advice knows. My recommendation was responsible for at least 6 other P

I work for a scientific institute doing ocean research. When properly utilized the cell was extremely good for doing Ocean models. I do a lot of sea surface temperature, sea ice, climate, waves, tide and ocean circulation models. My work machine is now better than the PS3, but when I bought it it was significantly better then what I had, and it's extremely hard to get time on our HPC cluster, which was about the only other thing I could run the models on. With my PS3 I was able to just start it running on a

Easy, assuming each game copy has a unique key. Then you can do it in software quite easily. "Opps, sorry, Update 6.2.1.7 has detected that this game was registered to more than one console and is no longer playable."

Sure, someone might hack it, but for the vast majority of consumers that would make being able to play a used game a thing of the past.